How a Single Swedish Submarine Defeated the US Navy

Share
Embed
  • Published on Apr 13, 2018
  • Be one of the first 73 people to sign up with this link and get 20% off your subscription with Brilliant.org! brilliant.org/realengineering/
    Join the Real Engineering subreddit: www.reddit.com/r/RealEngineering/
    Listen to our new podcast at:
    Showmakers RUclip channel at: goo.gl/Ks1WMpt
    Itunes: itun.es/us/YGA_ib.c
    RSS and Libsyn Audio is available on our site: www.showmakers.fm/
    Get your Real Engineering merch at: standard.tv/collections/real-engineering
    Editing Laptop: amzn.to/2GKXqb7
    Camera: amzn.to/2oyVNp9
    Microphone: amzn.to/2HOxVXu
    Patreon:
    www.patreon.com/user?u=2825050&ty=h
    Facebook:
    realengineering1
    Instagram:
    brianjamesmcmanus
    Twitter:
    Fiosracht
    My Patreon Expense Report:
    goo.gl/ZB7kvK
    Thank you to my patreon supporters: Adam Flohr, darth patron, Zoltan Gramantik, Henning Basma, Karl Andersson, Mark Govea, Mershal Alshammari, Hank Green, Tony Kuchta, Jason A. Diegmueller, Chris Plays Games, William Leu, Frejden Jarrett, Vincent Mooney, Ian Dundore, John & Becki Johnston. Nevin Spoljaric, Kedar Deshpande
    Music:
    Dan Sieg - A Sense Of Wonder [Silk Music]
    Manu Zain - Will You Be There [Silk Music]
    Silk Music: bit.ly/MoreSilkMusic
  • Science & TechnologyScience & Technology

Comments • 14 680

  • Hassnain Ali
    Hassnain Ali 16 minutes ago

    Who would win
    A aircraft carrier worth 6.2 billion dollars with some of latest technologies
    Or
    One sneaky boi

  • Mike Playz
    Mike Playz 21 hour ago +1

    The video didn't cover any attack tactics on how the Swedish sunk our ship in war games? Only how the Swedish used a diesel engine which is quieter than most engines. Which was very smart and not only silent ,but leaves no trace of radiation like most subs which can be detected? The real answer they are getting across is? "If it works don't mess with it". They just out smarted modern technology and won with a lower price tagged submarine proving that a $12.998 billion dollar Air Craft Carrier can be sunk with no problem using only one submarine. Imagine what 4-5 subs could do to an entire armed escort of the United States Navy in a real battle? "If done right we wouldn't stand a chance a against them".

  • juggliar
    juggliar Day ago

    american ships have the same quality like their cars: Pontiac, Cadillac, Ford, GMC, ... all cheap crap 💩

  • Khenty-imentiu
    Khenty-imentiu 2 days ago

    Lol.... It's bullshit
    The navy plays possum to give false confidence

    In war games they always lose

  • Patrick Andre
    Patrick Andre 3 days ago

    The Iranians did it with suicide boats and motorcycle scouts ... What's your point swedes ?

  • Lou Prentz
    Lou Prentz 3 days ago

    BS war games are bs

  • Daniel Karlsson
    Daniel Karlsson 3 days ago

    Many of the pics you show in the video (for example 1:23 and 2:07) are not the Gotland Class, they are of the new swedish model that will be even better, the A26.
    You can read more about it on Saabs webpage:
    saab.com/naval/submarines-and-surface-ships/submarines/submarines/?gclid=CjwKCAiA58fvBRAzEiwAQW-hzR11yEzF5kPg2mUG0jfP4PbsiWfE8u5kLPrYpf8lwqL_UgK8jSgUfBoCUi8QAvD_BwE

  • P16
    P16 4 days ago

    I'm from India. Is there any job opportunity in Australia after doing the course?

  • Jeff Trek
    Jeff Trek 4 days ago

    DBF USN 88-96 FT2/SS....if it doesn't submerge, it will sink..AKA a target

  • echo echo
    echo echo 4 days ago

    Super Submarine made by IKEA

  • Christian Benzinger
    Christian Benzinger 4 days ago

    Jeaaa bla bla bla the German u 32 did it all so like the French Submarine. The US Marine are not so smart to find this New Class of Submarines. And the have NO Sterling Engine for Underwather travel. Stupid Bullshit. The 2 Submarines how deliver a Fake Torpedo to the Aircraft Carrier has good Fuel Cells and a Elektrik Engine. The Diesel is only für Over Wather Travel. The Electric Motor is a Brushless Engine wiith a diameter over 2 Meter. Its Rotate Slow and has a direkt Drive to the Prop. No Gears nothing. Yea and the Gorland Class from Sweden have got a Sterling Engine but the only work Surfaced. Dived the use the Same Electric direct Drive like the French an German Sub´s.

  • Ryan Travis
    Ryan Travis 5 days ago

    That intro was hilarious "making them the second biggest Air Force in the world only behind the actual US Air Force

  • A. A.小丹
    A. A.小丹 5 days ago

    0:26 new-klewer-powered ship

  • bhig3
    bhig3 5 days ago

    But how did they do it tactically?

  • Isaac Tui
    Isaac Tui 6 days ago

    Basically the U.S. thinks that expensive weapons can win the war🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣

  • djayjp
    djayjp 6 days ago

    Maybe they should put the carrier in the middle, not out front on its own?

  • Sathish Kumar
    Sathish Kumar 6 days ago

    I have a doubt
    sonar detects any object in it's range. the object need not to make noise .

  • Rakesh Sarawag
    Rakesh Sarawag 7 days ago

    I like indian submarin

  • Jarrod Yuki
    Jarrod Yuki 7 days ago

    sweden is an american ally so america can simply ask for the blueprints and its navy would be safe again.

  • Joachim Hupe
    Joachim Hupe 8 days ago +2

    Russian :
    invents systems ,that can deteckt nuklear waves.
    Sweden: you might have outsmarted me, but I have outsmarted your outsmarting .

  • Angela Kemle
    Angela Kemle 8 days ago

    Prolly should say that brilliant you have to pay for.

  • D M
    D M 8 days ago +1

    Think an Aussie diesel electric done this to a US carrier as well

    • Leo Vredenbregt
      Leo Vredenbregt 4 days ago

      D M no like, it WAS the sub that sank it. The aussies did it first with their Swedish designed boat

  • Dachiii0w0
    Dachiii0w0 9 days ago

    IKEA Liked that

  • Barry Baz
    Barry Baz 9 days ago

    Great Commentary, A real natural .

  • Matias Torres
    Matias Torres 11 days ago

    Cool sub. But does it have RAILGUNS?! SALVATION!

  • TheSupriest
    TheSupriest 12 days ago

    A french old nuclear powered submarine did exactly the same in 2015, against the USS Theodore Roosevelt

  • TheSupriest
    TheSupriest 12 days ago

    A french old nuclear powered submarine did exactly the same in 2015, against the USS Theodore Roosevelt

  • TheSupriest
    TheSupriest 12 days ago

    A french old nuclear powered submarine did exactly the same in 2015, against the USS Theodore Roosevelt

  • TheSupriest
    TheSupriest 12 days ago

    A french old nuclear powered submarine did exactly the same in 2015, against the USS Theodore Roosevelt

  • TheSupriest
    TheSupriest 12 days ago

    A french old nuclear powered submarine did exactly the same in 2015, against the USS Theodore Roosevelt

  • TheSupriest
    TheSupriest 12 days ago

    A french old nuclear powered submarine did exactly the same in 2015, against the USS Theodore Roosevelt

  • TheSupriest
    TheSupriest 12 days ago

    A french old nuclear powered submarine did exactly the same in 2015, against the USS Theodore Roosevelt

  • Blade hell
    Blade hell 12 days ago

    Subs too op please nerf

  • Bvlvi Woodson
    Bvlvi Woodson 12 days ago

    This man can Segway! Whoa bro 💪 salesman

  • Максим Баркан

    And now imagine what russian can do with US floating coffins if they figure out how to destroy them for decades. Sweden dont think about that at all.

  • debian Stark
    debian Stark 13 days ago

    radar cant, and will never be able to render a 3d image moronm wtf are u talking about! looks like you get ur facts from call of duty intros or some shit

  • debian Stark
    debian Stark 13 days ago +1

    "how a container ship knocked off state of the art destroyer"

  • Danny. S Omega MC
    Danny. S Omega MC 13 days ago

    Question... This was virtual Right?

  • armyforlife3 Nao
    armyforlife3 Nao 13 days ago

    Hotel trivago

  • Jake Conner
    Jake Conner 13 days ago

    u wot?

  • qrayka
    qrayka 13 days ago

    Great ,i always like underdog story

  • OOF GHOST
    OOF GHOST 14 days ago

    Stirling 2018

    Reminds me of pp

  • C.C. ORR
    C.C. ORR 14 days ago

    Lol
    Incompetence

  • Mick Martin
    Mick Martin 14 days ago

    Nothing new folks....Aussie Navy have been doing it for years and anyone who is in the know, when Countries are "Playing" war games the Yanks ALWAYS cheat at every opportunity and they are still "sunk"! They can't even play fair with their allies! Says a lot about a Country.

  • Tom Vallée
    Tom Vallée 15 days ago

    Funny for once you don’t have a crazy american to say in the comment section that usa have the best army and the best country...

  • TheKaffeeKlatsch
    TheKaffeeKlatsch 17 days ago +4

    And the sonar tech heard faint sounds of Abba playing over his headphones.

  • TheKaffeeKlatsch
    TheKaffeeKlatsch 17 days ago

    I served on the submarine that sunk the USS Enterprise in war games forty years ago.

  • Martin Andersson
    Martin Andersson 17 days ago +1

    The USN is the most powerful navy in the world, by several orders of magnitude. They did not choose to go for only nuclear subs because they are stupid or because they did not think it through. They did so for very good reasons.
    Nuclear subs can submerge and stay submerged. Meaning, they have strategic stealth. A US sub can go from San Diego to Mumbai submerged meaning noone will see this movement or know where the US submarine fleet is at. A diesel sub would have been detected by satellites if nothing after a day or two.
    The diesel sub's advantage is that it can turn off its engine and run on batteries. The reason to have nuclear reactors in subs is that they do not need oxygen. So they can stay submerged forever. However, this also means they can not turn off their engines. And eninges have movable parts and violent processes and steam and bubbles. That are noisy.
    To sum up:
    Diesel sub, Superior stealth on the tactical level.
    Nuclear sub, Superior stealth on the strategic level.

    • Martin Andersson
      Martin Andersson 16 days ago

      @Howard Pearcey It has two diesel engines and two Sterling engines. I don't know the specifics but I think the Sterling Engines can be used for both very slow propulsion in absolute silence with short bursts of speed.
      Today, diesel sub means sterling engine also. Sterling engines are pointless in nuclear sub since you always have to pump cooling water no matter what, which is noisy.

    • Howard Pearcey
      Howard Pearcey 16 days ago

      How about a Stirling engine? No big banging internal combustion. This sub had a silent Stirling engine.

  • john mcdonald
    john mcdonald 17 days ago

    Wasn't this story a hoax?

  • Gilhelmi
    Gilhelmi 18 days ago +1

    I now want a Sterling Engine in my car.

    Such a beautiful thing. She is glorious.

  • marcus7564
    marcus7564 18 days ago

    When are you releasing the next logistics of d-day episode?

  • mips
    mips 21 day ago

    South African submarine SAS Manthatisi sank the whole NATO fleet involved in exercises in 2007, 8 ships in total.

  • Nehmo Sergheyev
    Nehmo Sergheyev 21 day ago

    I assume this has already been thought of, but can't you avoid the revealing-of-location problem of active sonar by sending a small drone sub a few km away and have that produce the initial ping? It's location could be concurrently transmitted with a coded accompanying sound signal.

    • Jake Conner
      Jake Conner 13 days ago

      @Howard Pearcey also, doesn't radar give a profile to the radar operator of the size of the object's mass? Or is that only in aircraft technology? If it does, then the size of the drone sub will give away the presence of the other fleet members because the range likely won't be congruent with the location the mini-sub can reach with its own range.

    • Howard Pearcey
      Howard Pearcey 16 days ago

      That ping will also reveal the parent sub from its own echo return.

  • Blake Tankersley
    Blake Tankersley 22 days ago

    you didnt even talk about how it got the shots off. booooo

    • Howard Pearcey
      Howard Pearcey 16 days ago

      wouldn't have too, just run a firing exercise with umpires present

  • Never Legend
    Never Legend 22 days ago

    THE NEW GEN SUBS even more quiet than this swe sub..

    NO ONE CARESA ABOUT NAVY ANNYMORE THE NEXT WAR GIANT WAR WONT BE WITH CONVENTIONAL WEAPONS..

    its gonna be SUN BEAM;S FROM SATELITES AND METEROS HURLED DOWN Jsut watch... its going way beyond waht you people can imagine...

    forget bullets and shit, just wait and see ...bombers+ xD 1945 weapons xD

    • Jake Conner
      Jake Conner 13 days ago

      @longnamenocansayy currency and peoples opinions are the new medium for warfare.

    • longnamenocansayy
      longnamenocansayy 15 days ago

      putin said we are so far advanced above thermonuclear. the end result is the same but it's not thermonuclear. remember word trade center buildings in nyc. i think that was space platform weapons. whatever it was, it melted the steel and turned the buildings into dust. whatever they used, that's 20 years ago and they've gone quantum leaps since then.

  • mrtan tai
    mrtan tai 22 days ago +1

    basically the vietnam war when you can't see the vietcong

  • Just a Tungsten rod
    Just a Tungsten rod 23 days ago

    0:29 , HMS Queen Elizabeth : Nah

  • Drew W
    Drew W 25 days ago +1

    Not sunk, a hit was registered on it. That sub only has 2 tubes and once it reveals its location by emptying them it only has a few moments to dive out of harm's way. Certainly noteworthy, alarming even, but that would be like firing two torpedoes into New York City and expecting the city to collapse.

    • Drew W
      Drew W 12 days ago

      @Howard Pearcey They aren't in use, tactical nuclear warfare has been off the table since the 1960's. I can't speak to Russia any farther than US intelligence can, and they agree with me, but if the US started reactivating tactical nukes you'd see mass officer resignations. Nuclear proliferation concerns aside anyone trained to operate these things knows that in the context of naval warfare, you will not be far enough away to avoid lethal radiation exposure should one go off.

    • Howard Pearcey
      Howard Pearcey 13 days ago

      @Drew W Gad you have faith in the wits and ethics of Trump, Putin and Kim. I don't. A nuclear torpedo into a carrier group or convoy could mean the difference between win and lose. If I had nukes I would never take their use of the table. Else why have them.

    • Drew W
      Drew W 13 days ago

      @Howard Pearcey Neither will use tactical nukes (I.E nukes used in the battlefield against mobile targets instead of on bombers and ICBM's against stationary targets). The risk far outweighs the potential reward.

    • Jake Conner
      Jake Conner 13 days ago

      @Howard Pearcey His presidency term is almost going to a second election and nothing worse than any of his three predecessors has occurred but you still drone on? I'll be sure to pay attention to your opinion now that you've alerted me to your retardation...

    • Howard Pearcey
      Howard Pearcey 16 days ago

      @Drew W Tell that to Putin, Kim and Trump.

  • Moo Cow
    Moo Cow 26 days ago +1

    lol sweden is too busy hiding people of the sword rapes and making sure their own culture disappears and hiding hand grenade attacks to even use a sub

  • DynaMike
    DynaMike 27 days ago

    I'm sorry "defeated the US navy"? That is not only a massively gross oversimplification of what happened, 15 years ago, but is just flat out wrong. The whole issue was the fact that the sub managed to get within the inner circle of protection the carrier had, undetected. The Swedish sub managed to take pictures of the carrier. Which meant it was in a position to fire torpedoes at it. No physical torpedoes were fired, dummy or otherwise. The problem was the Gotland's torpedoes are no where near powerful enough to sink an aircraft carrier, nor does it have a sufficient number of torpedo tubes. So this Swedish sub couldn't have even sunk the carrier let alone "defeated the US Navy". Any expert or even anyone who served in the Navy will tell you that's just talking nonsense. Plus launching a torpedo would have given away its position, and had it done that it's likely it may not have gotten out of there in one piece. And again, this happened 15 years ago. The US Navy has considerably updated and strengthened its ASW capabilities since then. Not to say a US carrier could not be sunk, but it's not as easy as some people seem to think. Moreover, even if an enemy sub managed to sink a US aircraft carrier, killing thousands of US service men and women, I honestly wouldn't want to be that sub, it's crew or even a resident of the country from which it was commissioned. Because the retaliation for something like that would be absolutely horrifying. Not only would that sub and its crew be mercilessly hunted down and destroyed, but the nation itself would be bombed and attacked furiously.

    • longnamenocansayy
      longnamenocansayy 15 days ago

      alternatively, what we display openly is not what we have in reality. meaning aircraft carriers and tanks are obsolete. they tell us our navy is fitting ships with lasers now. to me that does not mean lasers are the future, it means lasers are already outdated.